The NSNO Everton Forums

Never trust a rich man who wears a cap all the time.

Cereal Killer wrote: ↑Thu Feb 01, 2024 10:45 am Just a small point

But why the fuck does our appeal have any link to them approving/denying a takeover??

My thoughts are as it will then depend upon whether the PL see them as capable and fiduciary responsible to own the club!

What happens if we are relegated. Can they just buy us then or is there a different fit and proper person test they have to pass

Conspiracy theories might suggest that either -

a) the Prem don't want to approve their ownership before they finalise the outcome of the appeal, because Chelsea's defence of their misdemeanours is that it was done under previous ownership and the Prem don't want us to be able to use the same defence

or b) The Prem are actually working in conjunction with 777 to reduce our value by effectively relegating us so that 777 could then buy Everton for a cheaper price in the future.

Not sure I believe either of those, but I've seen those ideas suggested.

Bluedylan1 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 01, 2024 11:25 am Conspiracy theories might suggest that either -

a) the Prem don't want to approve their ownership before they finalise the outcome of the appeal, because Chelsea's defence of their misdemeanours is that it was done under previous ownership and the Prem don't want us to be able to use the same defence

or b) The Prem are actually working in conjunction with 777 to reduce our value by effectively relegating us so that 777 could then buy Everton for a cheaper price in the future.

Not sure I believe either of those, but I've seen those ideas suggested.

Another 'they're out to get us' conspiracy theory option would be that their waiting to see if the appeal reduces out points deduction and if it does and we're likely to survive then they'd then reject the 777 takeover making administration and another deduction likely, thus putting us back in the regelation mire.

all conspiracy theories aren't they...bottom line is they'll do as they please as they think they're untouchable...as per the previous outcome.

Bluedylan1 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 01, 2024 11:25 am Conspiracy theories might suggest that either -

a) the Prem don't want to approve their ownership before they finalise the outcome of the appeal, because Chelsea's defence of their misdemeanours is that it was done under previous ownership and the Prem don't want us to be able to use the same defence

or b) The Prem are actually working in conjunction with 777 to reduce our value by effectively relegating us so that 777 could then buy Everton for a cheaper price in the future.

Not sure I believe either of those, but I've seen those ideas suggested.

I haven't heard either before. But, i mean, option a) has a ring of feasibility behind it, doesnt it?

Not in a conspiracy "they're out to get us/save Chelsea" line. But I can fully believe they want to handle "one crisis at a time" and so they can put off making a decision regarding the "previous owner" defence until another time.

But the fact that is possible within the current regulations just goes to show how unfit they are to govern themselves.

"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."

I just don’t understand why it will take two weeks after the appeal hearing before the panel can reach a decision. Hear the appeal, look at the evidence, a jury could reach a verdict within a matter of hours but this way it gives Masters 14 days to influence the panel yet again with proposed punishment, it stinks. My hunch is we get five points back for this one then get slapped with another five to ten for the new charge.

Can’t see 777 passing the liquidity test !


Meanwhile, the 20 Premier League clubs will converge next week for a two-day meeting, at which proposals for replacing the controversial Profitability and Sustainability Rules (PSR) will be discussed.
One new measure that has already been confirmed is mirroring Uefa’s squad cost-control rule, which limits clubs to spending 70 per cent of their revenue on wages and transfers. The Premier League is set to bring in a similar rule, but with an 85 per cent limit.
The clubs are also expected to be presented with proposed measures that would replace the PSR rules, which have a ceiling of £105 million for financial losses over a rolling three-year period.
The Times has been told that
some proposals include clubs needing to maintain “working capital” of £25 million, to be sure they can meet any short-term financial demands, and to pass a “liquidity test”, which demonstrates that they can cover their debts in the longer term.
The new measures would also potentially require clubs to demonstrate that they could cope with any significant financial setbacks — such as the sudden loss of a big sponsor or a big drop in income as a result of a dip in performances on the field.

Escla wrote: ↑Thu Feb 01, 2024 12:57 pm Can’t see 777 passing the liquidity test !


Meanwhile, the 20 Premier League clubs will converge next week for a two-day meeting, at which proposals for replacing the controversial Profitability and Sustainability Rules (PSR) will be discussed.
One new measure that has already been confirmed is mirroring Uefa’s squad cost-control rule, which limits clubs to spending 70 per cent of their revenue on wages and transfers. The Premier League is set to bring in a similar rule, but with an 85 per cent limit.
The clubs are also expected to be presented with proposed measures that would replace the PSR rules, which have a ceiling of £105 million for financial losses over a rolling three-year period.
The Times has been told that
some proposals include clubs needing to maintain “working capital” of £25 million, to be sure they can meet any short-term financial demands, and to pass a “liquidity test”, which demonstrates that they can cover their debts in the longer term.
The new measures would also potentially require clubs to demonstrate that they could cope with any significant financial setbacks — such as the sudden loss of a big sponsor or a big drop in income as a result of a dip in performances on the field.

Like getting docked points that leads to relegation and subsequent loss of your better players ?

Escla wrote: ↑Thu Feb 01, 2024 12:53 pm I just don’t understand why it will take two weeks after the appeal hearing before the panel can reach a decision. Hear the appeal, look at the evidence, a jury could reach a verdict within a matter of hours but this way it gives Masters 14 days to influence the panel yet again with proposed punishment, it stinks. My hunch is we get five points back for this one then get slapped with another five to ten for the new charge.

I honestly don't think we'll get any back (hope we do) for 2 reasons
1. They cant show a loss of face
2. Like the decision to dock 10 points - how do they subsequently decide how to re-instate a random amount of points - 10 points equates to 3 wins and a draw - 5 points equates to 1 win and a draw - 2 points equals 2 draws etc etc etc.
this season we've won 8 drawn 4 lost 10 ? how do they decide....they cant just give us back points that we've earned randomly THEY SHOULD but bet they don't.
WHICH IS WHY POINTS DEDUCTION IS SUCH A SPURIOUS PENALTY...

TheRam wrote: ↑Thu Feb 01, 2024 11:01 am Never trust a rich man who wears a cap all the time.

what my missus sez about me !!

TheRam wrote: ↑Thu Feb 01, 2024 11:01 am Never trust a rich man who wears a cap all the time.

A rich guy in a suit and a cap is a sure way to spot a coke addict

4evablu wrote: ↑Thu Feb 01, 2024 1:11 pm I honestly don't think we'll get any back (hope we do) for 2 reasons
1. They cant show a loss of face
2. Like the decision to dock 10 points - how do they subsequently decide how to re-instate a random amount of points - 10 points equates to 3 wins and a draw - 5 points equates to 1 win and a draw - 2 points equals 2 draws etc etc etc.
this season we've won 8 drawn 4 lost 10 ? how do they decide....they cant just give us back points that we've earned randomly THEY SHOULD but bet they don't.
WHICH IS WHY POINTS DEDUCTION IS SUCH A SPURIOUS PENALTY...

Yeah my hunch assumed that we would only get tge five back if they had already decided we were going to get another ten which would relegate us anyway, our best hope is that Forest get a ten point penalty as Luton are going to pull away I think.